Slashdot Mirror
Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger for x86 Leaked?
patr1ck writes "Mac Daily News is reporting that Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger for x86 processors has been leaked to the internet already. Apparently the version running on the development kit machines is easily transfered to run on any x86 machine. Conspiracy theorists unite: an Apple marketing scheme?"
Apple has often put an expiry date into their software so it may only be good for a short period of time? enjoy
There was an unknown error in the submission.
...who has the torrent?
I wondered why they threw iLife in there. It really would be of little interest to developers, but if your stealth market was someone pirating the software to try it out, it would be near-indespensible.
So perhaps there's something to the conspiracy theory after all. I wonder if it would run on my older Compaq PC with a Pentium III and all Intel components.
I have a PowerMac G5 dual, which would surely outperform my old 700mhz Compaq by miles, but I have to admit my curiosity is piqued.
D
I bet there's a PC out there already running Tiger...
I doubt this was part of Apple's master marketing scheme. Still..this may help answer the question on whether or not the new x86 version of Mac OS X will run on generic hardware.
Considering the dev kits are standard intel chip/mobos I don't see why not, couldn't be that hard setup tbh
"WebTV: bringing the Internet into the shallow end of the gene pool since 1995" - Martin Bishop
Where was it leaked to? Sheesh..
Accidental or not, you can bet that this development has MS in a cold sweat. Seriously, if it wasn't for piracy, MS would never have gained their stranglehold. Now, the sudden possibility of OSX spreading frictionlessly into Windows' marketshare signals a major change in the commercial landscape.
"I wondered why they threw iLife in there." I can't even believe you asked that question. They put iLife in there because many developers write applications that interface (or supplement iLife).
having a large market share is more important then being able to stop piracy...
Wondering why i am doing so strange posts? I am trying to get a "+5,Flamebait" or "-1,Insightful" rating.
If this increases Mac's market share, at least in terms of software, how will it deal with an increase in viruses, worms, and trojans. Mac's will get them, that's for sure, but the deciding factor I think will be how well they respond to vulnerabilities.
And Apple is nowhere close to becoming another Microsoft. But thanks for playing.
I dunno who it is
but it prolly is fhqwhgads.
Report: Apple Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hits piracy sites
Saturday, June 11, 2005 - 12:14 PM EST
"There is nothing at all that prevents the version of Mac OS X that runs on the developer transition machines from running on any PC with compatible components," Jeff Harrell writes for The Shape of Days. "The Intel-based Power Macintoshes that Apple is showing at their developer conference are based on an Intel motherboard, generic Intel graphics and off-the-shelf Pentium 4 CPUs... I estimate that we're down to a matter of hours before Mac OS X 10.4.1 for Intel hardware is available for download on Internet software piracy sites and peer-to-peer piracy networks. (Update: A reader who for obvious reasons wishes to remain anonymous just demonstrated to me that the software is, in fact, already available on Internet software piracy sites.) If I can think through this stuff, Apple's management can think through this stuff. This is the most awe-inspiring stealth marketing move I've ever seen."
"According to reports, Apple's bundled iLife applications, major selling points for the Mac operating system, are already Intel-native and run at full speed... Given Apple's experiences with software piracy, particularly the rampant software piracy that spread developer builds of Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger all over the Internet this past spring, Apple's management from the top down knows full well that this developer preview will be in the hands of every kid with a cable modem within days of its release. Most of them will be able to install it on their own computers and run it and the full suite of iLife '05 applications at full speed, and run most existing Mac software in translation. As a result, Apple will give thousands, possibly millions, of people a taste of Mac OS X running full speed on their own PCs. Apple's giving their potential future customers a free taste, that's what they're doing. It's a try-before-you-buy deal," Harrell writes.
Also, full article (by Jeff Harrell @ ShapeOfDays.com)...
Mac OS X on Intel: Try before you buy?
Item the first: Apple is not staffed entirely by idiots. This is self-evident, and it's important to what follows. Keep this in mind as we proceed.
Item the second: The Intel-based Power Macintoshes that Apple is showing at their developer conference are based on an Intel motherboard, generic Intel graphics and off-the-shelf Pentium 4 CPUs. This information has just become public in the past few hours. (Comments I made to the contrary yesterday and on Monday were erroneous. The source who fed me that information has been sent to bed without any supper, and says to tell you he's very sorry and that it won't happen again.)
Item the third: It's safe to assume, given the timeframe, that the developer transition kits that Apple will ship within a couple of weeks will be fundamentally similar to, if not outright identical to, the Power Macs on display at the conference.
Item the fourth: The Power Macs on display at the show run a one-off build of Mac OS X 10.4.1 that incorporates the few necessary changes that were required to get the operating system running on the Intel hardware. This build includes Apple's bundled iLife '05 suite of applications.
Item the fifth: Because Intel's LaGrande security technology is not yet incorporated into any shipping products, it's safe to assume that it's not present in these transition-kit computers.
Item the sixth: Given items two through five, apart from the constraints introduced by hardware-software interfaces, there is nothing at all that prevents the version of Mac OS X that runs on the developer transition machines from running on any PC with compatible components.
Item the seventh: Because the Intel version of Mac OS X that's being distributed to developers is a one-off build, future software patches, including all-important security patches, will not install on top of it, making it totally useless to anybody who's not a developer of Mac software.
Item the eighth: Given it
Bill Gates said to be muttering something about "Tiger Tiger. burning bright, In the forests of the night; What immortal hand or eye. Could frame thy fearful symmetry?" Who knew he was a Blake fan?
"It's difficult to meditate on amphetamines." - Joe Walsh
It's most likely not "any" x86 machine, but rather those that Darwin already runs on. Whether it's a intentional or not, it's still good marketing though.
Against the grain
As for Apple becoming another Microsoft, I'm sure their shareholders would be delighted to see that happen.
For a second when I read this story I thought the same thing......And then I realized that I have a Powerbook and am typing this on Tiger 10.4.
I am such a kleptomaniac.
---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
I seriously doubt it was planned, considering Apple's desire to only publish something when it's 100% finished. Expect lawsuits to ensue, and heads to roll.
In my opinion, these people (read: the ones shamelessly distributing development software) ruin that which they have.
They may think they're doing it for the good of Apple, but in the endd, if the development 10.4_X86 has many bugs and crashes often, the X86 version is going to be reviewed in a bad light by "normal" (read: non-mac-fanatical) sites and journals.
grr.
B.
Every experiment which ends in a big bang is a good experiment.
Since Darwin is based on FreeBSD, are all open source kernel modules for FreeBSD fair game to modprobe?
Well say goodbye to the age when Apple made the hardware and the OS as a complete system.
Apple has now just become another Microsoft by the looks of it. What will the Mac fanatics think now?
Not really a fanatic...but I think it sucks. Guess they gave up on trying to do things differently...sadly, it actually looked like it was starting to work for them, too.
Mac OS X has been "leading a secret double life" for the past five years, said Jobs. "So today for the first time, I can confirm the rumors that every release of Mac OS X has been compiled for PowerPC and Intel. This has been going on for the last five years." http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/06/06/liveupdate /index.php
why cant they just run the normal Max OS X binaries on X86 if they're universal binaries like they speak of?
Before I download it....does it run on systems with an AMD processor that is equal to an Intel G4???
if your pants fit well, it's not only because of the pants
Not to mention that their $999 lease is not much of an obstacle for serious developers. Apple does not need new Killer apps to seed the desire to purchase new apples. So such a broad based seeding of the OS does them little good in that respect.
Now to answer cringley's question. "Why would they pre-announce the swtich a year ahead if it is so easy to port apps". People fret they will "osbourne" themselves when current apple users hold off purchasing a new apple waiting for the intel ones.
I suspect that an equally large effect may work the opposite direction. There 10 times as many high-end PC people out there that are about to upgrade their machines and may start to think. Hmmmm this new apple hardware might run windows, maybe I'll put off buying my next Dell-shitbox machine and see what apple rolls out. So this way by pre-announcing they cant get that meme going for a year. Thought's like that lead over the course of a year to the thought of maybe trying out OSX while they are at it.
And of course there's the developers that need to be stroked. gotta give them a year's notice. and apple has the cash reserves to suck-up the osbourne effect.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
I believe that Xbox 360 dev kits are supposedly PowerMac G5s running some custom version of Windows. (Although they may've been replaced with final hardware by now). So there are Macs that are runnning Windows, but unless you're a game dev you'll never see them.
10 PRINT "LOOK AROUND YOU ";
20 GOTO 10
how many laws would I break by downloading and installing it? (laws affecting Australia that is...)
"I wondered why they threw iLife in there."
:-)
And, of course, because they've compiled the iLife applications for x86, and want to prove that MacOS X on x86 runs real native applications. It's hard to argue that video editing, music playback, and photo organizing aren't "real".
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
I would be surprised if there wasn't a hidden serial number in the OS on each PC they distributed. I bet Apple, and their lawyers, will know exactly who leaked this very soon.
When Longhorn finally comes out, some tech people will have had OS X running on their boxes already and won't bother to switch and that is worrying Microsoft.
Apple makes killer hardware, which they make their money on, and set bar for what people are willing to pay for an OS AND for the quality that they should expect.
Unfortunately for Microsoft, that bar and the fact that people will have an alternative, means that Microsoft has less than three years to transform itself to be internet capable (If they already were, there wouldn't be viri, Trojeans, mal-, spy- and ad-ware all over their OS. Microsoft made a mistake are relied on third parties to take care of their problems for them.)
Either Microsoft can make the cut or it never could. They won't be able to rely on pulling anti-trust moves again. That sort of stuff goes on in backrooms and needs darkness to exist. Now, there's a light on in the room.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
I have some doubts whether this was a leak or a "leak". However, even if it was an unintended (by Apple) event, it could turn out to be the best things to happen to Apple, ever. A sudden boom in OS-X86 (you heard it here, first) could shake some cojones in Apple's executives' pants, and cause a paradigm shift in that company's strategy.
Basically, a shift from hardware towards software-based revenue.
Or not. Apple might utilize this event just to market OS-X86 to new users, users that would otherwise not have bought a Mac, and increase their future sales of Intel-based Macs. However, this strategy would work only on a fraction of those who tried OS-X86 for size, so the effect would be limited.
I say, Apple, have some balls and start selling OS-X86 and related applications! Stick it to Microsoft and cause a stir in the desktop OS marketplace.
Sigged!
I *am* really a fanatic, and I want to remind you that the reason it was starting to work for them was that they finally had hardware to sell that was competitive in terms of price and performance. That reason was slipping away as IBM screwed up all their promises, and Apple is doing what they have to to get it back. I'm one fanatic who's glad he won't have to justify buying drastically slower hardware anymore.
So if I get my hands on this, it's not going to run on my Athlon? Is it the Intel chip-set it's looking for (i.e. built in drivers for it...) or is it something in the instruction set on the processor?
$7.95/mo, 200 GB disk, 2TBxfer, MySQL, PHP, RoR.
Releasing a version of OSX that runs on standard x86 hardware should allow Apple to be in direct competition with Windows (to "switch" is simply case of buying OSX rather then an entirely new computer)
Of course it'll only work if they can get get drivers and software backwards compatibility sorted, which given they announced the switch to Intel in more then a year away they might just make it.
Your high if you think this leak will have a serious impact on OS X's market share. Considering that there will probably be ZERO programs released for it for a couple years, whos going to run it?
Also 75% of the computer using population wouldn't have the slightest clue on how to install it.
I'm just moving from x86 Linux (Debian) to "mainly Mac". Zero fuss out-of-the-box avantgarde functionality is the reason. Check out any online hardware store and view the list of current x86 CPU sockets and you now why.
I personaly couldn't care less wether my Mac runs on x86 or PPC. But you can bet your right arm that as soon as Mac gets to become the pissy fumbly ten-bazillion different component standards and driver issues DIY plattform the PC is today, I'm switching back. Unless, of course, anything Mac is cheaper by then. But I doubt it.
As long as Apple keeps a firm grip on a overseable list of components and I can get a good cinema screen with a good computer built into it that has me rolling the moment I unpack it and switch it on for the first time, they might aswell use VIA CPUs if they fancy that.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
Of course, the only way that this would make sense is if the developer release is time-limited. Let's face it, Apple is not ready to take on Microsoft head-to-head right now; it would be suicide for Apple to allow an easily-hacked version of Mac OS X that could run on cheap-ass hardware out the door.
Now, assuming that the dev kit *will* time-bomb, this would be a brilliant move. Of course, it might still be hacked, but the fact of the matter is that only a very, very small subset of the potential market will bother will figuring out the hack to keep it running.
As I've said before, the only negative impacts I see of Apple moving to Intel are:
1. (Temporarily) Increased costs for current Apple hardware/software owners.
2. Decreased competition in the desktop CPU marketplace.
Other than these two items, this whole thing is a net plus for the entire world, even Microsoft, who will surely benefit from direct competition with Apple in the future. Dell could possibly turn out to suffer some losses from this, eventually, but Michael Dell is an arrogant ass who deserves being taken down a notch.
Which of course, is not to say that Steve Jobs isn't arrogant at times, as well, but at least Steve is a consistently proven innovator who constantly (and relentlessly) pushes the technology industry forward, whereas Dell is, and always will be, just a cloner.
So, by all means, grab a copy, check it out. If you haven't developed for Apple hw/sw before, I think you might be pleasantly surprised enough to switch.
I'm sorry, but you've been duped. This is a fake story, of this I am certain.
The Intel build of Mac OS X only runs on the chipset supplied in the development machines, so it won't run on *any* x86 machine. Furthermore, outside of Adobe and a few other companies none of the other developers would have receieved their Intel Dev Kits yet. Lastly, all builds would have had digital fingerprints inserted on the CD and in vital binaries to trace any leaks (If not then Apple are stupid).
If someone leaked this then they are likely to be sued for hundreds of millions of dollars. This would mean any company stupid enough to let their employees leak it would be in dire trouble. Hence, my reasoning for saying that this is fake.
This is interesting and I would love to give Tiger a try. But unless this OS completely redefines for me what an operating system is, I will stay with Linux. Since I have already popped the cherry on a Mac, I doubt I will be blown away. I probably will download it for testing and learning purposes. But nonetheless, it is still encumbered by many of the same problems inherent with Windows. Of course I am speaking of limitiations on my freedom and as such Macs will have no place in my heart or personal work.
But this sure is good news for those of us who do not compete for Apple specific jobs because we cannot claim good faith expertise or even power-user familiarity with Apple products. This might just allow a new revenue stream for simplistic networking, routine upgrades, etc. So no doubt, this is a positive development.
Is there any word on how well the Intel build actually works for serious use yet? I mean, I agree that there'll be tons of PC-only folks trying this out soon, but I'm not sure it'll be such a big win. It'll be an OS running most applications in emulation, with native code that's never been tested on any large scale, and no patches available. Sure I understand the reasons for all of that, but if you were predisposed to think Macs had sparse application support, ran slowly, and weren't really as stable as everyone claimed, this could easily reinforce everything you thought ...
I don't know, tell me I'm wrong. Am I not giving average warez-users enough credit? Is this build more usable than I think?
Support doesn't just mean "Hi, tech support helpline, how can I help you?".
It also means patches and updates.
the article is slashdotted so I can't find the link to the site where they were hosting the torrent for it (assuming its a torrent) would you mind forwarding me the hyperlink?
Gravity Sucks
I, for one, am shocked.
... I would expect that it would be a lot like the old Rhapsody DR1 and DR2 releases were on x86 (anybody else remember those things?), except with newer and shinier "eye candy." That is to say, assuming it can even be booted, hardware support will be *extremely* limited. In fact, it may be even worse because while the Rhapsody DR releases on x86 were intended to target beige-box PCs (if only a few models thereof), this build of Mac OS X was only intended to target a single, very specific "PC"... namely the transition kit system Apple is making.
I would hazard a guess that would-be Intel Mac "owners" will have the most luck with something as similar to the transition system as reasonably possible (which would I believe be a Pentium 4 660, running on an Intel OEM motherboard w/ one of the 900-series chipsets and using its onboard graphics, maybe an Apple-supported optical drive couldn't hurt, etc...). And that's assuming Apple hasn't had special tweaks made to the BIOS that OS X/Intel looks for before running (they lock out non-Apple optical drives with special firmware, why would they be so careless when talking about a full OS running on non-Apple-blessed hardware, unless of course this is really a marketing conspiracy...?).
In summary, I think most of the people who download this (again, assuming it actually has leaked at all...) will be "eleet dood skript kiddiez" who expect they'll be able to pop a DVD into their Athlon 64 PC w/ killer nVidia graphics card, boot up and install OS X, and get a free "SuperDuperPowerMac G6+!!!" to play with iMovie and such on. But the chances of it actually being that simple are slim-to-none. It could still be a fun toy for more knowledgeable computer geeks though.
-Frank
Say some intern at Adobe or Macromedia snuck the cd over to his desk and copied it. Apple can track it down, but what are the going to do? Jobs can yell and scream, but he can't cut a company like that off, Apple needs them.
Geez, what makes more sense? a corporate conspiracy to have everyone pirate your sw and destroy your HW biz. Or some individual idiot working at a SW Dev looking for some notoriety.
And all those thinking this will benefit Apple, are smoking from the same Crack Pipe.
Those who pirate the OS to sit alongside windows are never going to buy it. It will always be second fiddle to their windows install that has all the applications. A curiousity to play with and if they decide to keep it around, well they will just look for a newer version to pirate.
So, now that PC users have access to OS X, can I safely assume that some doorknob somewhere is feverishly working on creating the first virus for OS X on Intel so it'll be ready when the first machines roll out the door next year?
Apple makes hardware, sells hardware and supports hardware.
The fact that the OS is on a much safer BSD base than Windows ever was, (in part because Apple understands that security can't be a retrofit,) and will ONLY BE SUPPORTED on Apple's own hardware may bring far more switchers from a far larger pool of switchers.
And this AFTER Apple has itself made the switch and dumped the IBM chip set.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
I doubt you'd be able to run it on Qemu, since even Darwin/w86 doesn't boot on Qemu.
Donate free food here
1) install torrent client .iso to cd
2) download torrent
3) burn
4) boot/install OS X from cd
How hard can that be? 99% of computer users just use the tools installed on the machine.
Your Average Joe
I was pointed to this article straight from the Slashdot:Apple RSS feed.
.. what would happen if Apple decided to just offer the OS without the hardware? MS is in an enviable position of having a monopoly on x86 pc operating systems. There is some competition but none of it is taken seriously at the moment (except for servers). Even cost conscious companies choose windows over linux for their desktops.
Mac OS X x86 fixes this.
It's got a unix touch yet it is user friendly (unlike almost any other flavor of unix). It performs well and doesn't suffer from any of the trademark Microsoft deficiencies (security fixes every week, poor usability, an indifferent software vendor, the occasional BSOD & a hefty pricetag). Users apparently seem to like it and there's a decent selection of OSS and commercial desktop apps (including MS office!).
Apple should be able to get 5% marketshare of the PC OS market within a year or so. I expect that there is a turning point where the marketshare will grow rapidly at the cost of windows. For example, a deal with Dell might be such a turningpoint. That means a steady flow of revenue that outperforms anything that can be realized through Apple hardware sales. Most of it is profits because they already did the hard work of writing & porting the software.
I'm actually wondering why they wouldn't do this.
Jilles
Support and Services- and to contribute to the company that makes such great software. While that sounds corny, it's in the back of everyone's mind that pirate's software. I have yet to meet a pirate that doesn't buy 2X the amount of software as dorks like you.
Anyone who has pirated software for any amount of time understands that you cannot kill all the animals in the forest and then wonder why you're starving to death. Microsoft doesn't understand this priciple, and neither do you apparently. Pirates worth a shit grep it.
I doubt that Mac OS for x86 was released by Apple, if at all, because if it uses Darwin 9.0, it won't be able to run on many processors.
In fact, I've tried running Darwin on my AMD system to no avail.
Just my 2 cents...
Talk about it. For a moment there i thought every story was a dupe from yesterday.
"Our interests are to see if we can't scale it up to something more exciting," he said.
Let's not forget where the idea for digital music distribution (more or less the only reason Apple is still afloat). Without song swapping on the net, that was around long before Apple, there would be no apple.
So does the OS show your running in 64bit mode with two processors? What about Intel running HT? Would it show up as a 32bit platform with two CPUs?
So many questions...
Life is not for the lazy.
I also seriously doubt the first version of OSX for intel is free of serious security holes. If people who use the leaked version are doing so for that reason they are mistaken.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
So many MP3 players out there, so many people own expensive iPods...
Best Buy can have you arrested
I'm just going to paste my standard reply to this below. It still holds true even though it was written months ago, before the Intel announcement:
/., or you'd pirate it-- either way, Apple would lose money on it.
----------
Look, you guys just can't get it through your heads that the reason why OS X works so well is because it runs on such a limited pool of hardware-- this allows the engineers coding OS X to make assumptions THAT CANNOT BE MADE in the x86 world, where a machine could be using one of thousands of motherboards, network cards, graphics cards, sound cards, etc. Windows developers have to code for the lowest common denominator. OS X developers code for specific hardware. Even the version of NeXTStep that ran on Intel ran on a tiny subset of the available PC hardware. If your CD-ROM drive and motherboard weren't on the "supported hardware" list that came with NeXTStep, you were SOL.
That little fantasy you all have of buying "Mac OS X for x86", running it on some homebuilt shitbox you cobbled together from spare parts, and having it work as well as a G5 runs Panther today will NEVER come to pass. Microsoft has spent twenty years and untold millions trying to achieve that goal, and they still have quite a way to go.
Do you think Jobs could just snap his fingers one day and a few months later have a product on the shelves that would run perfectly on every PC capable of running XP today? It's impossible. And even if it were possible, you wouldn't buy it. Why? Because Apple uses their software to sell their hardware, so a copy of OS X for x86 would have to be priced to ease the pain of a lost hardware sale-- you'd either do without it and bitterly bitch about the price here on
~Philly
jeez guys about 100 comments posted already and not a single link?
slashdot is slacking today!
a disturbence in the force, I sense...
no hint of it on the big trackers, nobody on IRC has seen it... looks like a fake to me.
That's a torrent of OS X for PPC! Pretty damn sure at least. This story is about the x86/Intel version of OS X that hasn't even been shipped yet (note the date on that file - 4.17.05).
only after 100 million users have it and there are viruses, spyware, adware and trojans. Then big smart company XYZ says we are making a secure OS and will commence patching all the holes we have made.
or
Do you think secure OS design starts long before the users have it and the hackers break it?
Your Average Joe
I haven't been able to find it on any Bittorrent networks yet, it must be only newsgroups so far.
My 3D Texturing Skinning work (under construction)
Can you be any more elitist narcisist asshole? Tell us how your FreeBSD runs iPhoto for example?
Quothe Bill Gates "longhorn draws the noose tighter"
Who smiled as he rode on a Tiger
They returned from the ride
with intel inside
and the smile on the face of the Tiger.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
the other developer releases for OS X have been made so they can not be upgraded with non-developer updates.
meaning if you have the dev builds of 10.4 (or whatever) when the official version ships you have to wipe that drive and reinstall the shipping product. you can download the updates to the developer builds (not sure if they track who downloads that), but when the final thing ships you will have to get another copy.
then again the actual OS X for Intel will not run on regular PC hardware... so if this story is even true, you will only have a limited time to keep current. the longest these boxes are allowed out in the wild is the end of 2006, but i do not know at what point they will stop doing updates for the software on them.
wouldn't there be driver issues if somebody tried to install this on their home windows machine? i would think it will only work on limited hardware, if it really works at all.
Why don't you take an hour and listen to Steve Jobs keynote address? You can find it easily on www.apple.com. Or, if you can, skip about half way in to get to the Intel stuff.
All the PPC apps will run on Intel using Rosetta. Steve brought up a bunch of PPC stuff on the Intel box, including Word, Excel, and Photoshop (with plugings). I believe it translates OP codes on loading, so you don't have the typical emulator slow down.
I've extracted the serial number from the version I downloaded, and it's SJOBS_000001. Whatever could it mean?
Slashdot - Mutual Assured Discussion
...so it's much harder to casually obtain one without paying for it.
Plus, those "cheap hardware" fanboys all own iRivers or whatever and mock the iPod.
~Philly
No one apart from developers has it and no one has reported running it on a non-Apple machine.
-- Boycott Shell
No, not everything with a PowerPC processor is a Mac. However, then high end Macs used in the development of the XBox 360 were.
Yeah indeed, got carried away there. Didn't think enough so it slipped my mind the PPC version gets pirated too...
Dependency hell? =>
This is definitely a torrent for Tiger for PPC. Just look at the comments...
... it definitely feels snappier.
The demo ran current (Motorola) OSX apps in emulation.
Probably not, since QEMU can't reliably run any non-free OS out there (well, I guess it runs DOS okay). Stick with VMware until they make their next release.
OMG! Wau!
Apple PPC version is what you linked to. This story is about the Intel version.
I'll agree they aren't close to being another Microsoft, but that's only because they don't have the power to do it. The attitude is already there.
Jar-jar, is that you?
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
Who didn't see that fucking coming?
Wow, a Mac user calling other people elitist narcisists? I guess FreeBSD is totally flawed due to its lack of one particular application, of which there are probably open-source tools to do the same thing. Get back to your Starbucks and your iPod and let the men handle this, Nancy.
Somehow, I doubt it; that torrent was added on April 26.
OMG! Wau!
Or bootnet, or sandalnet.
Homer was the first software pirate.
Like this torrent here right?
Sounds great, but I don't have any intel machines.
Can you run it under Virtual PC on the G5?
The development machine uses an Intel chipset, an Intel CPU, a Phoenix BIOS
It does not use a Phoenix BIOS.
It uses an Intel-branded BIOS, and this is plastered *all over* in the BIOS configuration itself. (No, really. No matter what xlr8yourmac says. Because, well, xlr8yourmac couldn't even figure out how to *get into* the BIOS, even though it's as simple as just holding F2 at boot.)
Further, it's still extremely unlikely that this story is accurate, because:
- While it would have been possible, it would have been unlikely for someone to have imaged/copied the entire contents of the drive, and even if they did, it's unlikely it would run on generic x86 hardware because:
- No, there aren't any fingerprints, but the problem is that even Darwin x86 supports an *extremely narrow* range of hardware. Mac OS X/Intel's support is just as narrow. You can hardly take this and install it on any PC.
That little fantasy you all have of buying "Mac OS X for x86", running it on some homebuilt shitbox you cobbled together from spare parts, and having it work as well as a G5 runs Panther today will NEVER come to pass.
I don't care about G5 performance. If I could get Mac mini performance on a Thinkpad instead of having to buy one of Apple's s***box laptops to get a laptop running OS X, even if it cost as much as a Mac mini just to buy that copy of OS X, I'd buy it.
Good reason: buffer overflows are easier on x86 than RISC because the instruction set is denser. This does lower the bar a bit, but it won't make any difference to most of us for a year.
Bad reason: "the only reason OS X doesn't have as many viruses as Windows is because it's not as popular". This one has been disproved a bunch of times, but it's still a popular meme among Microsoft apologists.
And all those thinking this will benefit Apple, are smoking from the same Crack Pipe.
Windows and Office benefited enormously from "Pirate Domain" distribution, over the long term. Would Apple benefit the same way? I don't know. Whether Apple did this deliberately? Probably not, but it's not impossible: Steve Jobs is pretty savvy about this kind of stuff (according to Cory Doctorow anyway) and he's hardly a babe in the woods when it comes to the computer underground.
Are you in any way related to the soup nazi? I'm a big fan..
"It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
Specific Subject: The Death by Drowning of Percy Bysshe Shelley.
It has long been reported that: "On July 8, 1822, less than a month before his 30th birthday, Shelley drowned in a sudden storm while sailing back from Pisa and Livorno to Lerici in his schooner, the Don Juan." --Wikipedia
The Wikipedia quoted above is accurate. The Drowning of Shelley is one of the facts that I remember from British Litt..
While it's true that Shelly died from asphyxiation, it is not true that he drown as reported above. The whole story of his drowning was PR cover for the true cause of his death by asphyxiation.
The real cause of Shelly's asphyxiation is that he choked to death. Specifically he choked on his own poetry.
"Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex, I could pinch them." --Marvin the Martian
Based upon the specs and pictures of the box the Intel PowerMac it is most likely an Intel Desktop Board D915GUX. This has the GMA900 onboard graphics adapter and DDR-2 memory that xlr8yourmac.commentioned. It also has the same layout as the photos of the PowerMac board.
show me a fanatic, and i'll show you an inherent desire for power. all of us little apple obsessed trolls have simply been waiting for this, so that we can run through the computing wolrd raping an pillaging...
shiny little apple! just gaze at it a little longer.
Because we all know that Apple uses serial numbers, copy protection and fingerprinting all over their place in Mac OS X. Not.
On developer seeds they do. That's how they track down people who post developer releases.
Please refrain from making comments about topics you know nothing about. OS X is not FreeBSD; it simply contains a large amount of FreeBSD code. It does not use the FreeBSD kernel, nor does it use any of the shitty graphical interfaces or applications that FreeBSD shares with Linux. It is an entirely different system. And frankly, many of us that use FreeBSD have paid for at least one release anyway--why haven't you?
Esta debe ser la primera vez que veo un comentario en slashdot en castellano.
This has to be the very first time I ever see a spanish comment on slashdot.
Articulos para gente geek: Poleras, linux, libros y mas
I first ran Windows on a Mac about 8 years ago. Insignia Solutions produced SoftWindows a long time ago.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Speaking as a stockholder and for a smaller number of stockholder friends : Woohoo!
Now, assuming that the dev kit *will* time-bomb, this would be a brilliant move. Of course, it might still be hacked, but the fact of the matter is that only a very, very small subset of the potential market will bother will figuring out the hack to keep it running.
All it takes is one "forensic programmer" to break any copy protection or time bomb Apple has on this software, and the broken version or the recipe will be all over the place. It's called the "smart cow" problem (eg: last line of this story).
I thought that developers would still be at WWDC, and that it would take a couple of weeks for them to get their machines.
And the other thing is, surely Apple didn't just give them a nice install DVD - they would have just preinstalled the system.
Now, if it has leaked already, and Apple did give them a nice, easily installable DVD - then yes I think that Apple has done this deliberately. If Apple doesn't bother to go after the leaker, or can't find them - then this is an Apple "release".
Damnit - I wanted my nick to be "WouldIPutMYRealNameOnSlashdot"
how will it deal with an increase in viruses, worms, and trojans.
Currently there are zero "live" worms or viruses for OS X.
So any at all would be a "dramatic increase", but it'd take a lot more than a "dramatic increase" to get to the point where it's even a minor annoyance for anyone who's smart enough to figure out that they didn't REALLY win a million dollar lottery in Nigeria.
See, the biggest potential holes that have been found in Mac OS X aren't one-step exploits like the nasty ones that really kicked off the big flood of Outlook worms back in the '90s... they're more like accelerators for social engineering attacks, you still have to convince the victim to open a file or attachment. Even if you catch someone you can still drop a Dashboard widget on, they still have to run it.
Not that these holes are OK, but they're only tiny steps down the road to Internet Exploiter.
The computers were twin G5's made by Apple. "Mac" is the right label.
"A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
Frankly, I think Apple needs to shore up OSS on linux just to get people off windows. Like the KHTML issue, iTMS on windows already runs that code! I'd be another shot at MS to open up the browser in iTunes Windows... and because it's based on a Linux browser, OSS people would already be in the loop. All they have to do now is get OASIS formats into their pre-installed iLife + iWork and they'll be golden for cross platform work. The only real thing Apple needs for Linux to be "complete" is iTunes and Quicktime made just for linux...it would fill a lot of the legal media on OSS issues [heck they could sneak a DVD player in their just for fun!] ... even if they just had to "WINE" it so it can't be hacked as easily. Remember, all the x86 machines out there aren't future sales, but the network effect of co-opting them for NOT-windows would turn the tide on the NEXT round of hardware purchases. If apple would just roll over and choose SDL for gaming then Linux gaming would also be a recompile away.. and windows would be the "odd boy out"
It's right there, MS is distracted, take it if you can!!!
That was uploaded in january
That was the WWDC last year where attendees got a beta of Tiger.
I'm not an Xbox developer, but I would imagine that this "custom version of Windows" is a version of the Xbox OS and not of Windows itself. The Xbox OS was derived from Windows 2000, and according to some people at MS only around 10% of it remained similar to Win2k. The rest of the code was seriously modified. The Xbox 360 OS is a continuation of the Xbox OS, not of Windows. In that case, it may have strayed very far from the Windows you see on your PC.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that the presence of Mac-based Xbox developer kits does not imply that Windows can run on Macs (or even PPC).
OLPC Australia
Urge to Steal.... Rising.... But.... OSX Fanboy bent on someday getting Powerbook.... Not....Christian.... To....Steal....
In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
There are four elements to a per se tying violation:
With the proposed tying of MacOS x86 to Apple hardware, we clearly have 2, 3, and 4. Apple's only defense is that the OS is an "integral part" of the hardware/software offering.
That defense just blew up. If you can run the thing on a stock PC, clearly the tying and tied goods are separate products.
This is an area where software/hardware companies consistently have lost. IBM lost decades ago, which created the IBM compatible mainframe market. Sony lost in the Connectix case. There will be cheap Mac clones from China, and Apple won't be able to stop them.
First:
Has anyone actually seen a torrent of this? has anyone seen it available for download someplace? Expect it to be > 1 single-layer DVD.
I think the "anonymous reader" is just making shit up.
Second:
This runs on very limited hardward. Mind-bogglingly limited hardware. If you do not have the exact board the DTK ships with, it will not work. You could conceivably hack Darwin to support more hardware, but you aren't going to add any sort of good graphics driver support, because all newer video hardware drivers are closed-source (I blame the DVD consortium and Macrovision).
Finally:
There is no promise that the existing DTK will continue to work in the future. This build of the OS may be the only thing that ever runs on them.
The only conceivable ways a non-Apple hardware vendor will ever ship with OS X is by
1) operating illegally
2) Apple providing the hardware boxes to be branded per Apple's allowances ("HP iMac"), or
3) making a deal requiring that Apple "blesses" and fully QA's the OEM's hardware.
If you doubt this, go find a Mac and look at the "Display" control panel. Then compare this to the windows equivalent clusterfuck. This is only possible because Apple, not some random vendor, defines the UI to meet the needs of their users across their limited supported hardware vendors. Supported features get rolled out in new hardware and in the OS simulataneously, unlike the Microsoft world.
Although you probably figured it out by now, don't click on that link.
10.3 added notifications of apps being launched for the first time under certain circumstances
10.4 seeks confirmation on the first launch of a Dashboard Widget
They've also added a bit to the root password prompt telling you what privelege is being sought
This kind of approach is one of the first things that Microsoft tried to alleviate the risks created by their approach to Active X security in the HTML control. The problem is that usually these dialog boxes are "crying wolf", so people become used to automatically answering "yes" to them like they answer "yes" to "do you really want to overwrite this file" or "do you really want to leave this secure website".
Even Firefox's XPI installer bothers me, and that requires about 5 clicks to whitelist a site, then you have to click on the link again and wait through a countdown before you can OK it. If you need to put that many warning layers in front of a potentially dangerous action, maybe that's a sign that you shouldn't be doing it.
But IE? Oh, man, I have had users come to me multiple times saying "Peter, I'm sorry, I clicked OK again, and now I think I have a virus". And, yeh, they do. Same people. These are the people who provide the pools of infected machines that keep Windows viruses alive.
There's a better approach.
I've never had someone come to me twice with a story like "I downloaded an attachment to my desktop and opened it and now I'm infected". It's easy to learn not to be "social engineered" this way, because there's no urgency, there's no pressure to click on SOMETHING on the dialog box just to get it out of your way to get back to work.
So...
Don't automatically open, execute, install, launch, or activate any object you click on in a web browser, unless you're opening or otherwise running it under a sandbox that you have a good reason to believe is designed to be as secure as the browser itself. Don't ask the user "should I do a potentially dangerous thing", just don't do it.
That's the pre-internet-explorer standard. With very few exceptions (and I've touched on one, and I'll get to others) this is the standard for every browser but Internet Explorer. Back in the early '90s, there was a joke going around about the "Good Times" virus. The "Good Times" virus was a virus that could run just by opening an email message. Everyone knew it was a joke because nobody would ever be stupid enough to put that kind of capability in a mail reader. If it happened accidentally, it would be treated as a bug and removed as soon as anyone noticed. I mean, this was obviously impossible.
Microsoft was that stupid. And Microsoft was not only that stupid, they were arrogant enough to place their plans for world domination by locking people in to Active X over applying the obvious fix. And the result? In the late '90s, email viruses went from "a minor annoyance for people who were smart enough not to believe they really won a million dollers in a Nigerian lottery" to a plague.
OK, that's Microsoft.
I don't think Apple's problems in the same area are big enough to make viruses more than a minor annoyance on OS X, no matter what the market share, but I could be wrong... and in any case I'd rather they not even get that far. So, what are the problems and what does Apple have to do to fix them?
1. There are no such things as "safe files". Turn off "open safe files after downloading" by default, and don't bring up the "I'm about to do something stupid" dialog until someone turns it on again. That'll give people an incentive not to let Safari be stupid, without making things any more annoying for the people who trust "safe files" than they are now.
2. There's no problem with Dashboard. It's not necessary to try and fix the Dashboard sandbox, because there's no way to effectively give Dashboard a real sandbox without losing the capabilities that make Dashboard useful. Just treat Dashboard as a regular scripting environment for OS X like Apple
You don't browse at -1 much, do you?
If Mac releases an x86 version of tiger is this the end of Microsoft? Who would not want a good os?
Sorry for being offtopic, but I think the next slashdot poll should be "What sort of scripted and automated action should we take against posts containg the phrase 'Soviet Russia'?"
Options should range from "Instant permaban" and "Slashdot their servers" to "Order nasty russian hitmen to do what's necessary".
Seriously though. There should be a slashdot poll on that exact topic.
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
I remember that we were three guys spending roughly two weeks each working on a very elaborate copy protection scheme for a game of ours. The copy protection was very nifty and used a lot of tricky code. It took less than two hours for a cracker to hack it.
The lesson learned was that crackers who specialize in hacking software typically don't have any major issues removing crippling code.
This pattern reoccured for other products. If you look around you will find that almost every product made has been hacked/cracked. Not even hardware dongles will protect you.
-- This SIG was cracked like a nut.
They tracked down the Tiger 8A294 seed through the torrent site that hosted it. Not through any form of fingerprint.
...) custom-burn every disk. I've done it, and it's no more hassle than hand-packing and hand-labelling in your spare time. Apple's only shipping these computers to select developers, so they could easily afford to cut a custom CD for each box.
You got a URL so I can file that one with "the CPU in the XBox is a 3.2 GHz G5" meme?
Since the seed is delivered as DMG* from the web site, there is no means of fingerprinting it...
Not being in the developer I don't know the details of how they distribute it. It was reported that Apple fingerprinted the seeds... and since Apple does have the technology to efficiently serve fingerprinted documents already (from iTMS, which has a LOT more customers), you can see how that's not hard to believe.
And for this project? Lots of small publishers (musicians, software developers,
Would they? Well, if it were me I'd do it. But I'm sure as hell no Steve Jobs, so maybe I'm just being overly cautious.
As someone used to seeing stuff days before it hits store shelves, and seeing leaks like this within hours on IRC, bittorrent, and Usenet... I have to say that if something THIS BIG hasn't shown up on any of those yet, it has to be fake.
:)
A shame, really. I really wanted to try this. I've been wanting to switch to Mac OS for a long time now, but I wanted it to run on MY hardware. Everyone's always telling me to switch to linux, well...I love linux, but none of the applications I use for *gasp* work run under linux. They do however all run under Mac OS
Friend: "The NIC is misconfigured..." Me: "No prob, I'll just telnet in and fix it." *Silence*
Care to site these sources you quote?
Awful authoritative if you ask me, with all the absolutes in there.
so.... where could i hipothetically get my hands on it?
I guess FreeBSD is totally flawed due to its lack of one particular application, of which there are probably open-source tools to do the same thing.
No, not really - the grandparent poster was pointing out that OS X is not equal to FreeBSD and followed up with a rhetorical question - if this *was* equal to FreeBSD, then how come there are applications, such as iPhoto, that won't run on FreeBSD but will run on OS X? Because it's not equal to FreeBSD, obviously.
Without resorting to trolling and/or name-calling or casting people into stereotypes (as every other direct ascendent of this comment), let's settle for the facts that a) FreeBSD and OS X are both good, solid OSes with their own benefits, and that b) FreeBSD and OS X are not equal. If you think that OS X has absolutely nothing useful over plain FreeBSD and that you're just happy using FreeBSD, then good for you! Keep using FreeBSD, and keep not using OS X, but there's no need for you to flame others over it (or for others to flame you over it, for that matter).
looks like a fake, has not appeared on any site... A million nerds looking for it you would think one of us would have found where it is by now...
Your Average Joe
it looks like it is a fake...
Your Average Joe
if its possible i am tempted to try mac osx via this method however I would never spend thousands for a mac or anything else just to try a os i've never used.
yeah theres the mac mini but I would at least want to buy a more powerful system for my general needs.
How does apple expect to sway people like me who would like to try these things and have the cash but are somewhat dubious of parting with alot of money for overpriced hardware that i've used.
its very difficalt to get my hands on one to even try.
I cant sit in a apple store for 6+ hours to get a feel
Look at the iPod Shuffle. It's very limited. Chic, but limited.
Same goes for the Mac Mini. Chic, but hobbled by HD I/O, etc.
Why would they not apply the same philosophy to some new Intel hardware?
Here's my theory:
Someone wanted to get their hands on the 10.4.1/Intel build because they couldn't afford it (note, not x86, since nobody said that this would be x86 code in the final release). They posted a story on some obscure Mac forum, knowing that it would get syndicated all the way up to Slashdot and other sites.
Their goal was to encourage anyone who DID lease the Developer Transition Kit to pirate their copy and put it on the web, so the original poster could download it and run it for free, like the greedy little bastards that they are.
Note, the Developer Transition Kit is a LEASED machine, by the way. You're leasing the hardware and the OS for the priviledge of having your apps listed as being 100% compatible at Day 1, instead of Day 100. You're not "buying" the machine or the OS, you're renting it for development purposes.
But now that this story is out, and rumors are flying, you can bet that Steve Jobs and the geniuses at Apple are putting in some solid checks for the OS-against-the-hardware (remember, P4 still has the CPUID built into it). Within a couple of days they should have the OS checking the hardware at bootup, and for any copies found floating around the web (which probably won't run anyway), they'll know exactly which Premiere partner leaked it, based on the code in the OS proper.
They have a finite number of Developer Transition Kits going out (and it costs $500 to $1300 to join as a Premiere developer to be allowed to get one, on top of your $999 lease fee). You can bet they'll be locking the OS to the hardware now, even if they weren't going to a week or two ago.
So the original poster just screwed himself, and potentially thousands of other developers who might have wanted to use this platform for development, but couldn't afford the $1,499 to $2,299 to join up and get one.
I think this is great on all sides.. good work everyone!
SHA? MD5?
-- I was raised on the command line, bitch
Normally I'd agree with you, but your "displays" example doesn't really hold water.
.plist file for the kernel extension under /System..., but not much.
go find a Mac and look at the "Display" control panel. Then compare this to the windows equivalent clusterfuck
Hmm. On my Mac I have "Displays" and "ATI Displays". On my PC I have a "Display" control panel that seems to combine the Mac "Screen Effects", "Desktop", and "Displays" panels... and in Panther Apple for some weird reason merged "Screen Effects" and "Desktop" into "Desktop and Screen Saver" making the Mac and Windows experience more similar.
Going back to my PC, the equivalent of the "Displays" control panel is the "Settings" pane on the "Display" control panel. It's absolutely identical on every PC I've used, and provides about the same basic controls as the "Displays" control panel with a slightly different layout.
Then there's an "Advanced" button. This brings up a dialog provides more features. Some of these features are common to all PC video drivers, others only show up for certain models of cards (for example, a card that doesn't support OpenGL or DirectX doesn't have settings that only make sense on those kinds of cards), but when they're there they're pretty much the same whether it's an nVidia or ATI card that's got those features. There's also a set of tabs with an ATI logo on them. These correspond to the tabs on the "ATI Displays" control panel, but they're a superset of the ones I have on the Mac.
That last bit is interesting, because even when I had the PC version of this video card, the control panel still gave me access to more features than the Mac control panel does. And, it has the same hardware as the PC version of the card: it's actually possible to use the ROM image from my card to flash the PC version and make it work in a Mac. Why can't I tune the Mac video card the way I can tune the PC one?
Well, I can do a bit more tweaking by editing the
This is only possible because Apple, not some random vendor, defines the UI to meet the needs of their users across their limited supported hardware vendors.
Or to put it another way, this is only possible because Apple defines the UI to provide access to the limited feature set they think I need, and doesn't even provide ATI a hook to add new tabs to the Displays control panel the way that can on Windows... so I have two separate control panels where Windows has one, and I need to edit obscure text files to tweak my OpenGL settings the way I want them.
I don't think this is just because Apple doesn't support as many different video cards.
Does this mean that there will be high end macs (ppc) and low end macs (intel)?
as I have been saying since (before) this whole thing started is that Apple should have been (and be) releasing Live CDs (or DVDs) of thier OS. more so now than ever before. People test drive cars, preview movies and music, we try BEFORE we buy. We re not very apt to abandon what we know works for something with promise with little or no recourse.
If Apple sent out free (or low cost) Live Disks that supported a fairly wide range configurations, anything outside of that Apple can say we don't support it. Tack a few crippling in it (such as no burning and limited application saves etc) and you ahve an excelent preview package.
Now Apple if Apple believes that thier OS has the goods and that it stacks up to what is out there, this is the perfect way to make that statement. And if it really has it, it will show in a shift in marketshare. And if that happens then we will all really see the security and stabilty that OSX has (or doesn't).
--
the OS is only as secure as its most ignorant user.
I had noticed that the Slashdot RSS feed that I had subscribed to was no longer refreshing so I checked the link at the bottom of the home page and found that it had a different URL than the one I had been using: Old: http://slashdot.org/rss/index.rss> Current: http://slashdot.org/index.rss>
There is one file called "Mac OS X 10.3 (Intel Version) at 631.15 megs
It goes without saying, I'm downloading it anyways, just to be sure (hey it might even be pron! Who knows!)
Another file called "Mac OSX 10.4.1 - How to get.txt" which reads, I quote:
a) wait upto 2006
b)
Become an developer http://developer.apple.com/ (500eur/year)
Buy the Development PC 1000eur, this package includes OSX for Intel (Preinstalled on HD)
Greets
Someone somewhere has some sense of humour (and / or works for Apple...).
Hello! I'm a disaster waiting to happen!
There's an ISO on the eMule network called "Mac Osx 10.3 (Intel version).iso". The hash is 7D9587606F550C2767667B09C10C1C68
I have no intention of getting sued by Apple for downloading this file. I have not verified its identity. It may be a hoax
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
The developers at Apple might consider a presicription of Detrol.
That stops untimely leakage, at least it does for my grandfather.
We've all seen Apple doesn't have many morals in terms of who it will and won't take down. I see them having a room of 20 people googleing the net for the next 3 months, finding any traces of how to get it (be it nzbs, torrents, etc.), and threatening swift and harsh legal action against anyone supplying info to get it. Perhaps it will survive on traditional p2p networks though (I don't think Apple has the knowledge or experience to take people down on that like the RIAA).
In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
1. To secure the final production version, Apple could run a third train of the Darwin kernel leaving PPC, x86 and a new MacIntel version. Assuring than only OSXx86 only runs on Apple hardware and accommodating the speculated differences between generic x86 PCs and proprietary Apple x86 powered computers. For instance, just because the XBOX360 can run on a PowerMac G5 doesn't meant the the final production version will or ever will again.
2. Give out a live CD based on the generic x86 Darwin kernel to entice PC users to switch. Similar to what Be did, but actually get people to switch..
3. If MS chooses not to continue development of VPC as a defensive move, Apple could still look to VMWare to provide virtualization for running Windows applications for those that have switched. Or integrate Bochs, Plex86, WINE, etc..
4. Apple could allow dual-booting of Windows and OSXx86. Although this is less likely to happen --remember Win95 / Dos6.22-Win3.11?
Apple's employees aren't dumb. They're primarily interested in keeping existing Mac users and developers happy by creating things like Rosetta and universal binaries. To think that Apple wouldn't apply the same philosophies towards disatisfied Windows users would be ignorant.
On PC hardware, margins are razor thin, probably even for Apple, %10 would be excellent.
On an OS CD/DVD set, @$129, it must approach %100.
I want to run Tiger.
I have my $129. I run an Athlon on an NF2 chipset, NVidia graphics. Where do I send the money?
(I'm pretty sure I speak for several million other protential customers)
Selling JUST the OS on a documented HW platfoem will not hurt Apple IMHO. It's free money.
Let's not forget that the PC manufacturer payed the "MS tribute" for each PC they sell. So, unless you put you PC together yourself, there is no 100% pirated MS OS.
Thanks. Firefox indeed still shows the old one.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
"Apple makes killer hardware, which they make their money on, and set bar for what people are willing to pay for an OS AND for the quality that they should expect."
That is a myth. Everyone says it so everyone believes it. Apple makes expensive hardware and to justify their spending that amount of money people site extreme quality.
Two months after spending $1500 on a Mac my HDD died and I lost everything. Sure, I should have backed up, and really I didn't loose much but my settings and all the time it took to get it all setup, but who expects their brand new "Apple" hardware is going to die? Well, now I do, as does anyone knowledgable enough to know better than the extreme quality myth.
Obviously Apple didn't make the hard drive, but it was a Fujitsu, which is a very cheap brand I would certainly never choose. I was not surprised one bit that it was replaced with an IBM drive, having to replace the drive more than once would really take a bite out of their profit. I was surprised they cracked the case while replacing the drive though.
Aside from the crack in the case everything was fine until the logic board fried. Luckily that was under recall, not a normal recall though where a severe flaw is found in the design and a company tells everyone with that product to return it and have it replaced. A special recall where you have to wait for the part that is known to be flawed to actually fail then you can return it and they will replace it with the same part.
On the plus side, I shipped it back with a note in the box asking them to replace the cracked case and they did. However, this time I got it back with a poorly mounted trackpad (the top left corner sticks up well past flush with the case) and significantly less Airport signal strength.
Now I do realize none of that is major, but there has been plenty of quirky behaviour to go along with it. It's had its share of kernal panics, lock ups, and general unexepctedly quits. Just yesterday something happened where all my settings were set to default and it can't find my keychain. All of that on top of significantly less performance than any other computer I own. While it's only a 900 MHz G3, I realize it won't have the performance of a dual G5 system, but there's been plenty of times it has had trouble keeping up with my typing.
Add this story to the countless stories of my friends, and I know if you have friends with Macs they have stories of their own, and it becomes quite clear that Apple does not make extremely high quality hardware that sets the bar for everyone else and justifies the premium price they set.
I'm not saying they suck. I'm not even saying they aren't good. I'm just saying they aren't extremely great and I certainly look forward to the day I could run OS X on PC. As does most of the world I suspect, even those that have never heard of OS X.
Not that you don't have a point about Microsoft, but your point is really the converse of what you said. Apple has until Longhorn to 'commercially' release OS X for PC. If they think they are going to take over the computer idustry on their hardware, well, they know better themselves. If Longhorn both comes out before OS X PC and plugs up most of the holes then the motivation for most to switch will be gone.
That was in no way a 'bailout'.
Remember that Apple had billions in the bank at this point. A $150 investment is a drop in the bucket. This was mearly a gesture of good faith in Apple that went along with a few other agreements between the two companies (the linked article goes into these).
That 10.3 one is definately an empty CD size file. It's all zeros.
0 c1c68|">Mac Osx 10.3 (Intel Version).iso
;)
ed2k://|file|Mac Osx 10.3 (Intel Version).iso|666000000|7d9587606f550c2767667b09c1
So don't bother with it. OTOH, you get great DL speeds
If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. - James Madison
but it's much snappier.
top level ones that "don't exist."
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
That phenomenon is generally due to the fact that Microsoft releases swiss-cheese shit, and Apple releases decent products.
15 minutes ago..
The original article talked about people stealing Mac software being a new problem for Apple, and at first I thought it meant application software. (Which wouldn't make much sense, but now I realize they meant the OS might be stolen.)
But now I wonder if someday there will be an open-source implementation of the Mac OS X APIs (other than GNUstep).
I hope that if so, it will be called "Cider."
Write Only Memory: Another pointless blog.
None, its all a lie.
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
thepiratebay.org now has a torrent for the cracked version of it
http://mininova.org/tor/55573 Not sure if it's the real deal. Trying to get the .nfo now.
Its not available from the good ol' pirate bay.
Don't know if it's real or fake... but theres a torrent @ pyratebay : /
No OS can take on windows on the desktop and survive, let alone thrive. Apple is much better off sticking to their own HW.
http://img173.echo.cx/my.php?image=osxonintel5wg.j pg
For serious Apple developers, yes. However, the $999 lease (must give back PC) plus $500/yr ADC Select membership might seem like a needlessly high expense to an independent developer (e.g. a hobbyist Linux developer), when a development box very similar to Apple's (w/o SuperDrive, keyboard/mouse) can be built for less than $600 from Newegg.com parts (and you get to keep your self-built PC).
Another comment shows that Apple's development PC is very likely a Pentium 600 series PC using an Intel D915GUX motherboard. I built a quick Newegg "barebones Apple development machine" (no SuperDrive, keyboard/mouse) for less than $600.
- intel BOXD915GUXLK Intel 915G Micro ATX Intel Motherboard ($115)
- intel Pentium 4 630 EM64T Processor ($228.99)
- CORSAIR ValueSelect 1GB (2 x 512MB) DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 533 (PC2 4200) Unbuffered Dual Channel Kit ($92)
- Western Digital Caviar SE WD800JD 80GB 7200 RPM Serial ATA150 Hard Drive ($60)
- IN WIN Z Series IW-Z720T.I300BFU2AD Black Steel MicroATX Mini Tower Computer Case 300W Power Supply ($44.99)
- Illegally downloaded developer version of Tiger for x86 (free)
- Total: $540.98 before tax and shipping
Add $500 for an ADC Select membership if it's absolutely necessary. When the development version of OS X expires, the self-built PC can continue to be used as a Linux development PC (or whatever).TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
Does anyone know if the "Mac OS X Tiger X86 READNFO-XISO" torrent is the real thing?
"Yes, but does that give them incentive to switch? Not for many. Why do you think this would be different if they didn't have to change their hardware, just their software? It still means, for the average customer, a $1,000 investment in new software."
Tiger for PC including iLife for $129. Think about that for a second. Would you buy it? Yeah, I know you're a geek so of course you would. But would you buy it for mom and dad too? Yeah I would too. See, now we're getting started. OK, you gonna tell all your friends about it? Yup me too. Yeah, I know a bunch of them are kinda fanboyish, mine too, but we both know they are gonna buy it just to try to make fun of it. We also both know that there isn't much they can make fun of. We also know that they've had a couple viruses and their PCs are running like crap because they are full of spyware. Yup, they'll only boot into Windows to play games from now on.
OK, now the other 50 people that call you for free tech support every week. You're not going to keep this secret from them are you? Me neither, finally some peace and quiet.
OK, that covers just about everyone.
Oh, oh yeah, your boss. Yeah, mine's not going to install OS X on all the PCs at work either. But he'll buy a few OS X PCs from the OEM vendor next year I'm sure.
Apple is still making Macs as well. MOST of the people with Macs today will buy Macs tomorrow instead of PCs. I know all my Mac friends will, I doubt your Mac friends are any different.
Face it, such a move wouldn't take over the business sector over night, but the average Joe just surfs the net and sends email. OS X and iLife will do just about everything they need. Thanks to MS for moving games from the PC to console, how often would most people have to boot into Windows?
I use my slow ass iBook more than any of my PCs anymore even though they are all much faster. I'd buy a copy of OS X for each PC tomorrow and rarely feel the need to boot into Windows. (OK, you caught me in a lie. I'd buy a copy of OS X and install it on all my PCs tomorrow, but still...)
Once enabling SW like an OS reaches critical Mass, like windows, it is virtually unstoppable, unmovable force. It becomes irrelavent which OS is technicaly better. The incumbent is now the recipient of a beneficial catch 22. It is the OS everyone must use because it has all the applications. Correspondingly it is where all the applications are being devopoped, because everyone is using it. Breaking this cycle is virtually impossible.
You could give OSX x86 away for free and it would not dent windows market share and would gain no development traction, because it would be second fiddle OS for geeks to play with, but everyone would stick with windows as their core. Since everyone would probably have Windows as well, developers would just keep targetting windows.
There has been no shortage of desktop x86 OS contenders. OS/2, BeOS, Solaris x86, FreeBSD, Linux and yes NextStep.
Tell me which one has a market share to speak of, which one has comercial software being developed for it?
Apples best strategy is remain captive to it's HW and offering a premium HW/SW experience rather than becoming another Windows casualty on the desktop.
I seem to recall that most operating systems for personal computing need drivers to interface with hardware. Given Apple's ostensible plans that MacOS X x86 will run only on Apple hardware, it is highly unlikely that Apple has created such a comprehensive set of drivers as would allow MacOS X to run on any majority of PCs. The greater probability is a hardware requirement set so stringent that only PCs closely resembling the Apple developer box will run the OS with an acceptable degree of functionality.
So I say the idea of running MacOS X on any commodity PC is, at the moment, a complete myth.
Washington, DC: It's like Hollywood for ugly people.
The argument that Apple controlling the hardware gives them power over Windows is dead. Apple doesn't control the hardware any more, just the price.
A Mac today is a PC with a different processor. A Mac tomorrow will be a PC.
Back in the day a Mac was a very different animal. It was made up of parts that Apple designed or chose to use because it had advantages over PC hardware. Every aspect of a PC has been refined to the point to where it was the best choice for Apple to use, now even the processor.
Like shooting fish in a barrel, really.
"A language that doesn't affect the way you think about programming, is not worth knowing" - Alan Perlis
but...
Own3d!
Driver support for Linux sucks because Linux developers have to write it from scratch using a crystal ball or hardware developers throw it together in a hurry to say they have it.
Apple does not and would not have a problem with driver support. Especially when they had a 50% market share in a matter of days.
All Athlon64's include SSE2. The newest Athlon64's even include SSE3. What are you even talking about?
... and in the DRM, bind them.
"There are too many x86 combinations out there for Apple to consider selling OSX for Dells. Isn't going to happen. Please deal with it so I can stop posting the same obvious stuff!"
Linux is not OS X. That should be all I had to say, but just to make it clear...
Driver support in Linux sucks because developers have to write drivers from scratch using a crystal ball or hardware developers throw it together real quick to say they have it.
Apple has never and will never have a problem with driver support. Hardware developers will be falling all over themselves to support OS X.
Supposedly this is it, but I'll believe it when I can install it.
http://thepiratebay.org/details.php?id=3343842
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
"For the vast majority of non-technocratic computer users, OS X does everything they need"
This hasn't changed with a move to x86. If the Mac OS is all they need, why didn't they all buy Mini's?
These non technocratic folks, as you put it, seem unlikely to install a totally new OS. You don't need to be a geek to use Linux, just to install it.
There is one simple critical fact that will never change. The vast majority of people will use the OS that ships with their computers and that will never change.
Windows succeeds on the sales of Dells, OSX will sink or swim on the sales of Macs.
Selling an OS that is not tied to HW is a doomed enterprise. A big part of the Microsoft push has always been about getting their OS bundled with Hardware.
"100% on software? Do support techs work for free? Did their developers work for free? Did their QA staff work for free? Will bug fixes cost Apple nothing? Is the manufacturing and package design free?"
Depends on how many units sold. See hardware requires a lot of people to do work for each unit sold, whereas software almost all the work is done when the product is done. The more copies you sell, the less it cost you to make each one.
That's why Microsoft makes SO much more money than Apple.
As Apple's market share shot up, so would their profit on each unit sold. If they continued to make their own Macs and sell OS X for PC the OS money would pretty much be exactly as the other guy said, 100% free money.
That is if they think my buying OS X for my PC is costing them a sale of a Mac. Which they probably think is true but are dead wrong.
How many people have said that this changes nothing, a Mac is still going to be a Mac, just a different processor? They are right, in more ways than one.
Just as Mac users aren't going to jump ship over a processor, PC users aren't going to suddenly run out and buy Macs over a processor. Apple quite simlply wouldn't be losing anything by selling Macs with OS X and OS X for PC. They'd probably even sell more Macs that way because they would no longer be a niche market most people are afraid of.
I was browsing Make which I followed to del.icio.us which showed this link First mac on intel in the wild?. Can't see any details or links etc.., could be a fake of course, but figured someone of you here might be able to do a good analysis.
...
So to recap I did RTFA and at least I understood it - so watch who you call "dumby."
Chill dude.
It's not like the offending poster called you a bollock-juggling chimpanzee or anything...
It's hubris like this that caused the fall of Standard Oil. :) MS is starting to loose mindshare since people are getting tired of an insecure OS.
Most people don't really care what OS a computer runs, only that it will run what they want it to.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
I found it at thepiratebay.org and currently I don't see the torrent at the site anymore (http://thepiratebay.org/details.php?id=3343842), but here is the hash that azureus gives: 002F6FCC7DE9E96D198F686CDF1ABE8599EEFEAC
Good luck and it is probably a waste of time, but I don't mind wasting the bandwidth.
http://www.sledgehammercomputers.com
Several people who have gotten pieces of it from torrents have reported that if you open the file up in a hex editor, it's just "GNAA" over and over again... surprised?
just looked at one of the rars, its just GNAA or some shit repeated over and over... lame
It's fake. Here's a screenshot of a hex editor looking at one of the pieces.
http://users.chartertn.net/localh/gnaa.gif
Thank you providing that screenshot.
http://www.sledgehammercomputers.com
While the possibility may be real, the torrent isn't. It was removed from the pirate bay which means one thing. It was a fake.
Heh, talk about an awesome way to beta test.
1)Leak OSX Tiger x86 slightly modified to send dmesg back to apple.com
2)See what hardware is out of the box properly supported.
3)Free Data mining.
You know hard core geeks will install OSX instantly if the torrent was available. Which means normally higher end equiptment.
"Apple has now just become another Microsoft by the looks of it."
Why do you say that? Apple's releasing a version of their OS that runs on Intel chips doesn't make them Microsoft any more than Microsoft's releasing a version of their OS that runs on PPC's.
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
So the words GNAA GNAA GNAA worked like a charm, huh? Yeah, I'm pretty sure simple text works on any AthlonXP system. Pre-cracked? Why would you want a text document to be cracked?
... and in the DRM, bind them.
3 days before it is finally downloaded. I hope it is not a NGAA text file...
Your Average Joe
MOD PARENT DOWN! That nfo file belongs to the copy that just repeats the words GNAA GNAA GNAA ad infinitum. I wish I could find a real copy.
... and in the DRM, bind them.
Apparently the version running on the development kit machines is easily transfered to run on any x86 machine.
Well duh. A lot of people were naysaying in the last article that this would NEVER happen.
Of course, I tried to correct them. Silly people. So I ask again: why is anyone surprised?
Higher Logics: where programming meets science.
Popped up on MyBittorrent although I'm not sure if it's legit or not... MYBT shows so seeds/leechers, but there's quite a few once you start the transfer. 3 BT
Doy! Seems like it's the same fake-torrent posted on mininova... sorry! :(
Surely someone has already verified this, but I thought that I would confirm that the mininova torrent is definately GNAA repeated forever. I did a tail on a partially downloaded RAR file and the result was GNAAGNAAGNAAGNAAGNAAGNAA.... (you get the picture...).
Both the current torrents, located at thepiratebay.org and mininova.org are confirmed fake. All rar files contain the repeated strand GNAA (http://www.gnaa.us/) - antislash.org reports that the GNAA released the fake packs to troll slashdot.
The file tiger-x86-xiso.iso is the fake GNAA release
As of this time THERE ARE NO CONFIRMED REAL COPIES of the intel x86 build of mac osx 10.4 released on the internet
Any copies that are about 970mbs can be assumed to be this fake release
"It's hubris like this that caused the fall of Standard Oil. :) MS is starting to loose mindshare since people are getting tired of an insecure OS."
We can only hope, I am no MS fan and I would change to another OS if it supported everything I want to run. But in reality if you are reasonably carefull you really don't have to worry about the security issues with windows. Just don't use IE/Outlook, use a firewall and don't install crap unless you know it is spyware free. The only people likely to install another OS have the ability to manage the security issues.
"Most people don't really care what OS a computer runs, only that it will run what they want it to."
No disagreement. I just don't believe the theory that releasing OSX for generic HW is the panacea that most here make it out to be, like overnight everyone will format their HD and dump windows.
Part of this reason is exactly that most people don't care and most people don't want to be bothered reinstalling their OS.
probably no link with gnaa.us and antislash.org is just an it company, they didnt report anything.
The Torrent going around as: Mac OS X Tiger X86 READNFO-XISO It's a complete fake. When the image is booted it shows a picture of a guy showing off his Bu** H**e.
Later.
You've been on that torrent for 3 days??, especially when it got posted Sunday?? or did you get it from another link
Gravity Sucks
If anyone has had time to look at a partially downloaded file, its filled with "GNAA" over and over, in each and every file, its a fake.
the torrent that is floating around is fake. if you unrar, burn, and boot like the .nfo file says, it just boots it to a very lovely goatse image. no joke, wasted two hours of my life and made a coaster out of some DVD+R media. HILARIOUS!
Perhaps Apple is partnering with Intel to corner the market on the "mini" computer market, as well as make up for IBM's failings on the laptops. Intel had just hyped the release of their mini. So Apple transitions the Mac Mini to Intel and captures broader marketshare through a cheap machine. If Apple can do the inexpensive machine best, which they probably can by securing Intel's first year of production or some-such. Meanwhile the PowerPC is targeted for the high-end market. I would say the Dual 2.7GHz with a FSB of 1.35GHz is still quite powerful, and IBM does still have dual-core CPUs on the way which should make this kind of FSB speed a huge edge in future updates. Remember, they kept a working version of the OS on x86 for five years before using it. What makes you think they won't continue to do the same with PowerPC for ten years in the hopes of IBM getting things back on track? IBM is pushing PowerPC in the Asian market hard now, while Microsoft/Xbox is creating a market for PowerPC code (where's the conspiracy theories on this one, BTW?).
The other day i was givena tour around one of the big newspapers here in amsterdam and was could not avoid noticing the many hundreds of G5s (for pre-press and art/web production) and sunflower iMacs (for everyone else). I asked how many IT staff they had and the answer was 2. Two people do the system admin etc for an entire newspaper. They also eschewed a 'real' content management system for their web publishing because their head of web publishing prefers to use templates and to write ad-hoc applescripts. And all works brilliantly. Seriously if you've ever worked in a 100% osx environment then you know just how excellent it can be. Apple becoming another Microsoft - if only. I doubt too many people would complain about Apple dominating the OS landscape the way MS does now.
I used to have a better sig than this, but I got tired of it
956meg one is a fake as well? I have 5 hours to wait to tell.
Your Average Joe
It shows the goatse.cx guy, yuck.
It installed and runs just fine on my setup.. the only issue I found was when I hit the Windows key. I won't ruin the surprise for everyone, but let's just say you shouldn't press it if you're offended by profanity.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Is the Mac.OS.X.Tiger.X86.READNFO-XISO torrent file a fake/hoax? It sounds too good to be true...
Your Average Joe
Well the leak is a fake. In case anyone wants to know, it shows a picture taken from a famous shocksite. I don't know if it destroys your hd or anything, I tried it inside a virtual machine.
Yeah...got goatse?
Why does everything on slashdot eventualy turn into a plot to destroy linux????? The world isn't out to destroy linux FACE IT! This is just Apple making more money and selling more systems.
Assuming this comes with Xcode and gcc, I'm sure there's plenty of developers of small applications that would like to get a head start on porting their small business or open source apps without shelling out $1499 (signing up, then getting the box) for something they'll have to return.
Best. Goatse.cx. Trap. Ever.
http://rssmac.altervista.org/video/
Why is this such a common mistake? No, I'm not a grammar or spelling Nazi but this one seems to be all over the place on /.
"Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
http://maconmac.bastix.net/intel.mov http://maconmac.bastix.net/intel3.jpg Looks legit compared to the other one...not sure though, what do you guys think?
A new torrent of the Tiger Developer beta just popped up:
i ls&id=328287&query=intel%20mac
.
... it's an executable, and if it's from some unsavory character, might do unspeakable things to your pc.
http://torrentspy.com/search.asp?mode=torrentdeta
It's entitled "MAC OS INTEL X86 DEVELOPER EDITION", and looks like it's at least different from the fake "GNAA version" that had been floating around. The torrent delivers a single file called "macosxintel.exe"
I have no idea whether it's real. Anyone have a clue? If you do download it, BE CAREFUL
You are all discussing various niche topics while the point of this thread was about a leak that not one person on slashdot could be bothered to verify its contents. I see exactly 2 posts mentioning the actual goatse image that this DVD produced and almost 900 discussing the hypotheticals of Apple's business plans... Slashdot editors have never cared about being first with a story except for this one time when not one person could TEST the image before posting a link.....think of all the bandwidth wasted for a lame prank....
So the whole thing (the OS) was re-written for PCs? That sounds like a lot of work, and will apple lose money? It's like Linux a little bit, because you download it and install it on your PC. Whatever, I guess I'm probably a little confused.
5 HGR 10 PRINT "LOVE YOUR APPLE" 11 HCOLOR= 3 : HLIN 8,36 12 HOME : end
If you know where to look you can find win2k for the Alpha chip as well.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
AThalon XP series chips have SSE2 as well. Only chips without it are the old pre XP line AFAIK.
Well I've wrestled with reality for thirty five years doctor, and I'm happy to say I finally won out over it.
Hello everyone! I am writing to you all to dispell some rumor and information floating around about Mac OS X Tiger for x86 Intel platforms being leaked on the internet. First off, I was one of the developers that attended the conference. I received my developers kit yesterday and have had at it since I opened the package. 1) The kit has NOT been leaked to the internet - at least not as of today (6/18/05). Anyone who has been boasting that they have it have been lying through their teeth or posting grand Photoshop desktop shots. Up until yesterday I have searched EVERY IRC pirate channel, newsgroup, torrent sites, and P2P app that I could find. YES There are some that say they have it, but they are hoaxes and junk. I cannot say that it will not happen, as I am sure someone will put themselves at risk by uploading the x86 discs / DVD up on the internet. I will tell you all, I will NOT be one of them, so do not even waste your time asking. 2) The kit will NOT run on AMD based systems - I dumped it on my AMD system for giggles and got nothing but errors, instability, and crashes. 3) The Intel kit will work on Intel hardware only, and has support for nVidia and ATI cards. As for network, unless it is an Intel network port, it will not work. USB Keyboard and mouse are required, and you have to use the native OS X drivers for the mouse and keyboard, you cannot install the support software at all - obviously they are not written to work on Intel architecture. Printers, scanners, and other devices of the such do not work; so basically you need a 100% Intel board with the onboard Intel graphics or an nVidia or ATI card and you have a running unit. Anything else causes severe slowness, system instability, or it just won't plain work at all. I am sure someone will post a 'hacked' version eventually, so all you folks out there hoping to score a copy that will work with everything, do not get your hopes up for while. 4) Steve Jobs has already publically stated that the current plan is that the Intel hardware will contain an encrypted chip that will only allow the OS to run on Mac Intel hardware. The OS would have to sustain major hacking to get around this software security. I also read a post out there from some bozo claiming he wrote a BIOS bootloder to fool the OS into thinking it was an Intel BIOS - full of $h** he is. First off he doesn't have it to do that to, and second of all, you can't fool this build At least no one knows how to yet. Just thought this might help everyone - feel free to spread this post to other boards. Sardopsycho.